[Docs] Add support for more AI tools

[pedrosousa]

Summary

Addresses PCX-20187.
Agent Skills seem to have better cross-tool support than rules thanks to Agent Skills open format.

Creating this PR as a first proposal.
As outlined in PCX-20187, some drift between different rules/agents/skills files for different AI tools is acceptable as we make improvements and updates.

Status of features by tool (supported + used in this repo) being added in this PR:

Tool	Commands/prompts/workflows	Rules	Agent Skills?	Agents?	Plugins?
Claude Code	Custom slash commands	Rules - not used	Agent Skills	Subagents - not used	Plugins - not used
Cursor	Commands	Rules	Skills - not used; nightly release only	?	?
GitHub Copilot in VS Code	Prompts	Custom instructions - not used	Agent Skills 1	Custom agents - not used	Tools - not used
OpenCode	Commands	Rules - not used; single AGENTS.md file	Plugins - not used; via plugin	Agents	Plugins - not used
Windsurf	Workflows	Rules	openskills repo - not used; via external tool	Agents.md - not used; single AGENTS.md file	?

Documentation checklist

• The change adheres to the documentation style guide.

Footnotes

1. Claude Code config style for Agent Skills is supported out of the box as a legacy config location. ↩

[github-actions]

This pull request requires reviews from CODEOWNERS as it changes files that match the following patterns:

Pattern	Owners
*	@cloudflare/pcx-technical-writing
/.github/	@cloudflare/pcx-content-engineering, @cloudflare/content-engineering, @kodster28

[github-actions]

Preview URL: https://2d00af00.preview.developers.cloudflare.com
Preview Branch URL: https://pedro-pcx-20187-docs-add-more-ai-guidelines.preview.developers.cloudflare.com

[elithrar]

given we are trying to focus on fewer tools, I am worried this PR just creates a ton of drift + maintenance problems (which means quality issues).

The result of this PR is a ton of duplicate prompts & config - I don’t think we should be merging this.

[caley-b]

@elithrar I appreciate you sharing your feedback. We can definitely scope this PR to focus more on our external contributors because we don't want to shift internal tooling standards. We want to accommodate our external contributors, who are likely using different tools than us. By including these files, we hope to streamline the content contribution process for the community. Re: drift, we are down to update them when we hear feedback and review/approve PRs from contributors who suggest valid improvements.

[TownLake]

• Each of these tools expect some of the file names or paths/structures to be specific (like .
• What is contained in those files, though, winds up being duplicative (like guidance about our PR formatting style preferences).

Should we keep the unique pathways/changes as just empty sign posts and the actual content itself lives in one consolidated file the others pull from?

[pedrosousa]

I'll do some local testing to double check if essentially doing a "redirect" from the expected file location to a consolidated file (via a relative Markdown link within a short sentence, explaining the purpose of the separate file) works as it should.